Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

klogg4 t1_j231rse wrote

Reply to comment by RaezorXN in AKG K712 Pro and Headphonesty Power Calculator? by Smol_Beanie_Boi

I have K612 myself because out of all AKG K6/K7 series they were the most listenable by default and (funnily) they were the cheapest. Still they're bright, piercing and bass deficient by default, although no problems with upper mids, + that deficient bass is surprisingly good extended - K701/702 have less bass that's not extended at all.

>Could be that you're comparing to harman target?

Yes I do. I approve Harman target because that's how I understand the linearity of sound when I do a sine sweep, and that's the sweet spot where music is the most detailed and entertaining for me. K371 is not completely Harman neutral but it's close, and I prefer its sound over the whole AKG K6/K7 series. It's just not comfortable sadly because it's a closed back.

Harman is epic for everyday listening, and I would say it's great even for mixing. K6/K7 series is good for evaluating the cleaniness of the sound (is it artifact free? Does the space feel right?), otherwise they're not good both for critical listening and for professional work because they're very colored - bright and cold.

3

RaezorXN t1_j232uph wrote

Well there we go, if we're taking harman over-ear target as the "right" sound, i absolutely agree with what you've said. K6/K7 line are thin and K371 is better than aforementioned. I do find it a little weird that you think that K612 are sharp, while i can agree that they're on the brighter side of neutral in terms of upper-mids and treble, probably your ears are more sensitive in these areas, then mine, that or i'm just a fan of bright sound.

But then i prefer IEF target. Again, harman is fun, but i simply don't like it. I'm not going to talk anything about professional work, as i do not have expertise in that, but for me, i do prefer not having that elevated bass, which harman has, and with that said, maybe you'll understand my point of saying that both K702 and K612 at least aren't thin, and at most are good headphones nonetheless.

Going back to the point of headphones changing sound with amplification, i don't have any other examples other than K702 of this effect. Again, I will check once i'll come home either confirming your point, or remaining of mine. I do think that Beyerdynamic T1 has same characteristics, but i'm saying that not off my experience, but rather off people saying things on internet.

1

klogg4 t1_j23vi55 wrote

K612 has multiple audible narrow peaks in treble that make the sound piercing - it's not about the whole treble being elevated, it's about these peaks. Fun story is - I have heard Beyer DT990 250 ohm, one of them. And the trick was - even though treble was obviously very elevated, I didn't find these headphones too piercing to my ears. Going through the sine generator helped to get the drill - I only got constant upsceding from 4 khz that never got into a dip or peak until 10 khz. This is a preferable thing for me - I'm OK about a bit elevated treble, I just dislike when treble has sharp peaks and dips.

As for the bass - I can't argue with Harman because all headphones by default sound bass deficient comparing to good near-field or far-field speakers with correctly tuned subwoofer, while Harman does not - it does the impression of speakers pretty much accurately. But AKG goes even further because they feel bass deficient comparing to even Sennheiser HD650 which are bass deficient too (though it's about extension there - no information under 100 hz).

Fun thing is - I can't call AKG being particularly detailed either, even though it should be the main point of having reduced ("tighter?") bass.

2

RaezorXN t1_j24l549 wrote

Well i guess i just comes down to personal preference after all. I do like my k702 in both tonality and detail, it's less of a "less bass=more detail", but rather "less bass = me more like it". I'm not very sure about K612, as i don't own them currently, but comparing K702 to HD600 both of which i have at hand right now, i would choose akg over senny, and i would choose them both far over K371 which i keep mostly because it's sometimes fun to stirr things up a bit.

Anyway, as i said, i did try using my K702 with both my amp and my phone. I admit, the difference is a lot less than i expected, i didn't notice much difference in neither bass nor mids. I did, however, notice difference in treble, from my phone (Redmi note 8) the treble is sharper. The problem with my methodology is that i am using different DACs while changing AMPs. I think, that the extra sharpness might be because of lost detail, as with K5 pro the treble is effortless, while with my phone it's... Clipping? Might be, i'm not shure, but it definitely results in an overall sharper sound.

So you were right, it does seem that amplification of headphones is all volume. I really want to try now my KA1, to finalise this, but it's broken, so better luck next time. Probably my experience after buying K5 was due to a better DAC in it, which resulted in less harshness.

1

klogg4 t1_j24uov5 wrote

>I think, that the extra sharpness might be because of lost detail

It may be because of high output impedance as well. But maybe yeah, it's a distortion.

I personally found Xiaomi phones to be problematic with software sound chains by default (effects, equalizers that you can't turn off, problems with gain, etc). So maybe DAC/Amp in your Redmi are not that bad, you just need custom firmware like Pixel Experience or something like that to keep software sound chain clean.

2